You hit the nail on the head, Ezra. Although you tend to be refreshingly consistent with regards to speaking common sense. It's neither pro- or anti- either 'side' to realise that people will quite obviously see many instances of yards and miles on even the shortest of journeys. It's also correct to argue that many of the road plans would be in metric and as we've seen here the emergency markers on the side of motorways (and, by the way, on some dual carriageways) are metrically distanced. It's one of those occasions that we know about regarding 'public consumption' versus the technical aspect. You could even probably say there is some 'hidden metric' to some degree. When driving down the motorway, though, in an average British car (and I mean 'British' for the British market and sadly not 'mad in Britain') the driver will see many measures. This will be mph and - on some cars - a smaller ring of km/h. They will also see miles covered, down to tenths in some cases. A temperature gauge may well quote Celsius temperatures. Outside the window the driver will note distances and speed limits in the main. These will be miles (and fractions) , yds, and mph. On motorway driving you won't see width and height signs unless the road is being dug up when you might see imperial only or imperial with metric. If you crash your car badly - or your car stops working on the motorway - you might (but not definitely) get to use the markers at the side of the road. Chances are you might be asked to read off what is written on them. To most people they will be quite unaware of the fact that these figures mean something metrically. Even less people will know that there is an argument going on regarding whether these signs are metric or - strangely on this listserver - whether these signs are metric (yes, that's not a mistake!) Ezra - your point summarises the experience of an ordinary Brit - and - infact - anyone from abroad visiting the UK who might be more sensitive to the use of imperial, ie more than indigenous Brits who take them completely for granted. Perhaps we could steer this more towards the use of imperial or metric on roads in the USA which - after all - is what this listserver is meant to be representing (even if the occasional glimpse of 'how others do it' adds some interest to the debate).
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 16:26:45 +0000 From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: [USMA:46677] RE: And, by the way...... The core issue as I interpret it is what is the daily perception for the typical British driver as they drive up and down the roads in the UK, i.e., what impression "stays" with them and affects their usage of units in daily speech. In this regard I'd wager that the overwhelming presence of Imperial signage clearly marked as such is what influences those drivers the most, which I am convinced is the main reason why "miles" is still used as much as it is over there. -- Ezra ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Davis" <[email protected]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 5:22:15 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [USMA:46675] RE: And, by the way...... "Thank you Stephen - your post with pictures confirms what I said. No 'm' (for miles OR metres), no km no yds. They're unitless. Just the number (refer to you own 'copy and paste' for how they relate to 500 metre markers)" Oh, Steve....I'll give you 10 out of 10 for trying at least. Just because they don't have km written on the signs, they're not km, when HM Government points out that they clearly are? Measurements are clearly in km, 20,000 of 'em up and down the country on slip roads. That would appear to strongly suggest they do exist. "They are for emergency crews - and they give a quick way of pinpointing a broken down car or an accident." Not altogether sure what your point is here. This negates the existence of of these signs how exactly? "In the past we have had the discussion on this very listserver on the use of 'm' for miles - eg 'Services 23m'. In the USA they make extensive use of 'mi' for miles to differentiate from 'm' for metres/meters. I don't know why we in the UK decided to use 'm' for miles rather than 'mi' or 'Mi'." Erm....not with me, you haven't!! I'm not sure what the issue you describe above has got to do with the fact there is 20,000 signs on UK public roads with kilometre measurements on them.Yes...there are signs on Motorways with the letter "m" that signifies miles........your point is.....? "Stephen - we appear to be in agreement." Well the clear existence of 20,000 signs with kilometre measurements on them on public roads up and down the country would suggest that one of us has great difficulty in admitting we've been caught out being disingenous about this issue. I think that's probably you, Steve! . ----- Original Message ----- From: Stephen Humphreys To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 10:39 PM Subject: [USMA:46672] RE: And, by the way...... Thank you Stephen - your post with pictures confirms what I said. No 'm' (for miles OR metres), no km no yds. They're unitless. Just the number (refer to you own 'copy and paste' for how they relate to 500 metre markers) They are for emergency crews - and they give a quick way of pinpointing a broken down car or an accident. For "quoted imperial", as it were, you need to look at the huge signs showing directions to towns, cities, services, motorway work etc. In the past we have had the discussion on this very listserver on the use of 'm' for miles - eg 'Services 23m'. In the USA they make extensive use of 'mi' for miles to differentiate from 'm' for metres/meters. I don't know why we in the UK decided to use 'm' for miles rather than 'mi' or 'Mi'. Stephen - we appear to be in agreement. From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: [USMA:46670] RE: And, by the way...... Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 19:51:44 +0000 "Martin, They don't have 'm', 'km', mile ('m' again), or yds on them. They're not for public consumption. Although I'm not going to stop you 'using' them ;-)" Well...Martin has included a web address that seems to show their existence. Over to you, Steve, old bean! Incidentally, a quick google search found this article: http://www.libdemvoice.org/20000-road-signs-in-kilometers-an-evil-eu-plot-17417.html This is the article: 20,000 road signs in kilometers – an evil EU plot? By Iain Roberts | Published 3rd January 2010 - 4:31 pm This is the first Christmas that anyone travelling on our motorways really couldn’t avoid signs measuring distance in – whisper it – kilometers. Every 500 meters or so along just about every motorway – and some trunk roads – in Britain, one of these blue signs helpfully tells the the stranded, mobile-phone wielding, motorist not only which road and carriageway she’s on but how many kilometers she is along it. Not miles. Not even good old British furlongs or barleycorns (which is a shame). But evil revolutionary French kilometers. Some EU plot force us to go metric? No. We might have our litres, kilos and decimal currency. We even have generations growing up knowing how many miles to the gallon their car does without having the faintest idea how much a gallon of petrol actually is, but we’re not being forced to start measuring distance on our roads in kilometers (though I guess we might choose to one day, and I can’t say it would bother me personally too much if we did). These signs result in help getting to stranded motorists ten percent faster in an age when most calls for assistance are made on mobile phones and, when asked where you are the answer “on a motorway somewhere. Near Nottingham, I think.” isn’t actually massively helpful. For the last thirty years, our motorways have had posts placed every hundred metres, mainly for maintenance crews. Now the blue signs are helping motorists too. So as you drive around Britain’s motorway network, keep an eye out for the blue signs (especially on the M26 in Kent, which the Government appears to think is a slip road), ponder the creeping metrication of Britain and perhaps enjoy knowing just how many kilometers you are from the start of the road. ----- Original Message ----- From: Martin Vlietstra To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 9:27 PM Subject: [USMA:46654] RE: And, by the way...... Steve has obviously not traveled on any motorways for some years, otherwise he would have noticed the driver location signs (which are in kilometres). Wikipedia has a description – please visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_location_signs. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Stephen Humphreys Sent: 14 February 2010 22:33 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:46649] RE: And, by the way...... It's miles and yards, not miles and feet. (apart from - as you said - feet for width and height). I've yet to see my first sighting of a 'km' sign in my travels up and down the UK (and we've travelled extensively). Apart from anything UK cars use what's called a 'milometer' - a British morphing of the term odometer and miles. I don't see how UK cars could make use of distances in a system drivers cannot use on their instrumentation (unless they import a car from abroad - 'grey imports' - although I have seen many subarus bought this way which have had their instruments changed to 'mph only' presumably for the more stricter MoT stations). I've also not seen the use of km in newspapers - except for one paper called 'Metro' which actually has a policy of using metric(!) but even with that they'll bracket imperial (apart from, bizarrely, snow depth which they quote in inches but then bracket 'cm' - maybe they think inches are metric!). In practice the normal daily's will even 'translate' a distance which would ordinarily definitely be in km to miles (eg a report from France). Like domestic BBC new items. From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: [USMA:46644] And, by the way...... Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 20:42:06 +0000 .....although, again, admittedly rare, newspapers and books in the UK have been known to use kilometres as well as miles. Yes, all signposts on UK public roads are legally required to read in miles and feet (although this is not always the case) but some publcations, particularly newspapers, will happily mix kilometres with miles ----- Original Message ----- From: Stephen Davis To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2010 8:32 PM Subject: [USMA:46643] Re: Burma "I can assure you that almost all publications, and other media outlets, would use miles over here. Based on the non-metrication of our roads I'd guess." Except for private roads of course, which can use metric signs if they wish. And though it is admittedly pretty rare, you can find mixtures of metric and imperial on British road signs....bridge heights, for example, can often be in metres other than, or as well as, feet. A statement on the sorry mess that measurement is in this country, unfortunately. ----- Original Message ----- From: Stephen Humphreys To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 7:10 PM Subject: [USMA:46629] Re: Burma Not sure. Some publishers use kiolmetres for international books. Perhaps it's something like that. Like the way 'BBC World' would say 'The accident happened 3 kilometres from the junction' with the exact same feature being broadcast as 'The accident happened 2 miles from the junction' in domestic BBC stations. You mention it as a excerpt - was the spelling 'metER' as you mention or 'metRE'? I can assure you that almost all publications, and other media outlets, would use miles over here. Based on the non-metrication of our roads I'd guess. Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:34:26 +0000 From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: [USMA:46627] Re: Burma But then how does that explain why they gave the distance only in kilometers and not both kilometers and miles? -- Ezra ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Humphreys" <[email protected]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 5:40:34 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: [USMA:46622] Re: Burma Ezra:"I noted in one of their (free) excerpts from another part of the book that they referred to the length of a particular railway journey in kilometres, which I presume was done for the benefit of their (UK) readers." Surely you mean 'miles' (UK tracks being in miles and UK citizens usage). km would be there for Australia for example. Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell us now Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free Do you want a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free _________________________________________________________________ Got a cool Hotmail story? Tell us now http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/
